Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: tried to clarify services vs service catalog vs the utility itself


This working group will focus on defining staged requirement sets requirements for a service catalogue catalog and make recommendations as to how to implement such a service utility and where this it should be hosted. Use cases to inform the service catalog should consider the needs of management (e.g., reporting), operators, and end users.


  • What existing standards are there for service catalog description and management that can be adapted vs reinventing wheels (e.g., TMF Product Catalog API (see External Resources, below))?
  • How should services listed in the catalog be categorized? Does a new taxonomy need to be developed, or is there something that can be reused?
  • How should service catalog data be ensured to be accurate and reflect services that are offered and not retired?
  • What information about the service catalog is relevant to which reader for which use cases?
  • What degree of information should be available in the different use case scenarios?
  • Should there (eventually) be some sort of crowd source rating of usability of services?


  • Who would be the contact point for the catalog as a whole? (i.e., who operates the service catalog)
  • Can we assume a unified view should be possible from day one (like MET), or should there be one catalog per federation that can create a merged set with an eduGAIN-like SPoC?
  • Does there need to be a business model to support this utility?


  • What other areas have service catalog work ongoing (e.g., European Open Science Cloud, GÉANT Cloud catalog I2 Net+ and it’s followups), with which we might may be expected to interoperate or with, serve data from, or avoid duplicating effort.

Problem areas

  • Lack of one-to-one matching of SP entity to concrete service offering.  For example, SP proxies are the obvious, an obvious and current challenge as many publishers offer strange bespoke links per institution so it's hard to capture the service view etcviews or descriptions of individual services.




ACAMP 2016 notes: Guide to creating a service catalog: